Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Articles - Trust In The New Age Of The Cold War
Articles

Trust In The New Age Of The Cold War

Professor John WalkerBy Professor John WalkerApril 13, 2022Updated:January 3, 20236 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

The sad kinetic situation of the Russian war in Ukraine has created much instability on the world stage – observing the fallout of human tragedies and loss of life – facts we are all very much aware of and tuned into from the daily reports from the media. However, there are several unknown unknowns, of which those outside of the world of Cyber, OSINT, and Research may not be unaware of – the members of the unindoctrinated public. But before we can look at the overall logical implications, we may all face as we enter the new era of the New Cold War (NCW), a visit back in the time machine may help set the scene.

Circa summer 1945, as World War II comes to closure a group of Russian Schoolchildren from the Vladimir Lenin All-Union Pioneer Organization 1, a Soviet version of the Boy Scouts, presented the United States Ambassador in Moscow with a gift of a large carved wooden replica of the Great Seal of the United States – as a gesture of friendship to their wartime allies, AKA the United States. The wooden plaque hung in the Ambassadors study at the Spaso House with pride, but unknown to the recipient, this gestured gift also contained a cutting-edge listening device, used by the Soviets to eavesdrop on conversations whenever they wanted. The plaque hung undetected in the ambassador’s study until 1952— a staggering seven years. It would come to be known colloquially as “The Thing.” – See Fig 1.

Fig 1 – The Thing

With a background out of the world of Counterintelligence (CI), it won’t come as a big revelation if I add, for years, and even today I guess, it has been a known known for those on both sides of the fence to casually survey new building constructions of Government buildings – say during a casual dog walk, to get a closer look and feel for where ‘things’ were going – e.g., the power circuits, plugs, risers or other such constructive features which may be of use at some future juncture – maybe say, understanding the layout of a building prior to drilling a hole in the wall, and then rescuing any captives of a terrorist group – for example.

But what do I know about this murky world of Russian Agents – in the mid 1980’s post the Cyprus Seven Trial (also known as the Cyprus Eight Trial) was a Cold War espionage affair uncovered at one of the military bases in Cyprus during 1983 and 1984, I was the very first non-commissioned officer to be put into the pen in a Counterintelligence role – It was a bit like the preverbal pork chop in a … Following that, whilst in Amsterdam in 1993, I was approached by an ex-KGB Agent, a very nice man I am sure – but there is no such thing as anything as ex in the world of Intelligence. I was also lucky enough to spend some time on the ground in the KGB/IRA infested streets of the American Sector of Berlin, so I can attest with first hand awareness, I have smelt (but never tasted) the vodka at close at hand.

The point of above the above introductory paragraphs is to highlight the element of anticipated trust we may or have bestowed on our partners – say taking everything at face value – and here, I feel we may all agree in the new NCW, things must change in the interest of survival.

Some weeks ago, I wrote an article entitled ‘Russian Software Can You Take the Risk?’ – but I feel that outline did not encompass all the areas we must now consider in the new freezing world of technology.

I recall way back when the Government Agency GCHQ were a little more circumspect when it came to trusting technology, only allowing the procurement of laptops and computer systems from the approved list – yet, then a little short sighted as, such systems are of course manufactured with the integration of circuit boards etc from countries such as China!

So, what is the new risk posed by this NCW? Well, no longer do you have to get someone to hang a bugged wooden carving on the wall in your office – all you need to do for maximised invasion, and intelligence gathering is to get them to install a piece software, which at time of install, and even after a diffing process may be reported as clean. However, consider, upon any future updates or patching to that application could, in themselves be carrying an additional payload. And – what if the Russian company I am dealing with have moved to another country, say the USA, surly that would make them a safe and secure bet – maybe! However, whilst they may be out of the direct reach of Putin’s hand, the question is, could they be influenced and put under pressure through any relations left in the Soviet Territory though the well know employment of HUMINT and strong-arm tactics of the FSB?

My thoughts here are, is it possible that, notwithstanding the geolocation of a provider of software, they are clean and above board and trustworthy, and out of the pressured reach of the Kremlin? Or could they be sleeping agents of a longer game through which Digital Stealth Infiltration will be empowered at a time which meets the overall objective of the controlling masters? See Fig 2:

Fig 2 – OWASP Outline of potential implementable vulnerabilities

The final decision must of course be left with the owner company, or individual owner of the assets. Are we to throw caution to the wind, and allow our system/systems to be loaded with applications and technologies which could be acting Russian Digital Sleeping Agents? Or are we going to consider the Long Game when it comes to understanding the manifestations of the NCW, and the potentials of Logical Payload vectors sleeping within our assets!

My personal conclusion here is, it is easy to take down a wooden ornament from the wall when you discover it has been infiltrating your space and communicating intelligence to an adversary. It is quite another thing to back out trojan laden, spying software applications from multi-thousands of assets. You decide.

Professor John Walker

John is the Principle at Shadow-Intelligence (Si), partnering with PALISCOPE, BreachAware and iStorage. He is a Visiting Professor at the School of Science and Technology, Nottingham, Trent University (NTU) and holds the appointment of Editor in Chief for the International Journal of Cyber Forensics and Advanced Threat Investigations (CFATI). For the last decade he has delivered training courses in the Middle, and Far East to Commercial, Industrial, the Financial Services Sector, and Military Agencies, including the UAE, US, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia (KL), Singapore, Argentina, and Sao Paulo

He served in the Royal Air Force 22 years’, specialising in Counterintelligence, working with UK Agencies such as GCHQ/CESG, and others in the fields of SIGINT, COMINT and Satellite Communications, holding appointments such as System ITSO for a CIA SCIF.

In the commercials sectors of IT/Cyber he has worked for/with Logica, Bae, T5, GM, Experian, Betfair, Palace of Westminster, House of Lords/Commons, TSol (Treasury Solicitors) and provided Consultancy to the Saudi Arabian MOD, TRA (Telecommunications Authority (Dubai) and the Military Academy of Malaysia (KL) on SOC, CSIRT, Digital Forensics and OSINT. Within the last 5 years he has focused on Geopolitics, with global expertise around the UAE and Russia, Anti-Terrorist Operations (ATO), Cyber-Warfare, Dezinformatsiya (Disinformation) and Maskirovka (Military Deception).

  • Professor John Walker
    China Threat Recap: A Deeper Insight
  • Professor John Walker
    Missing The Point In The Current Age Of Cyber
  • Professor John Walker
    Part 1: Historic To 2022 – The APT And Logical Threats
  • Professor John Walker
    A Hairs Breadth

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

Exploited Faster, Patched Slower: Verizon DBIR 2026 Shows Security Teams Losing Ground

May 20, 20265 Mins Read

Security’s Blind Spot: The Threats Hiding in “Low-Severity” Alerts

May 6, 20265 Mins Read

Why OSINT deserves the same status as other intelligence disciplines

March 17, 20266 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}